Former Tory chair who recently took up the role, Amanda Milling, told the Commons debate on statehood recognition will not ‘in itself deliver peace or end the occupation’
New Middle East minister Amanda Milling has told MPs the UK will recognise a Palestinian state “at a time when it best serves the objective of peace.”
Speaking in Thursday’s Commons debate on recognition of Palestine alongside Israel, Milling added: “Bilateral recognition in itself cannot deliver peace or end the occupation.
“Without a negotiated settlement, the conflict and the problems that come with it will continue.”
The former Tory Party chair, who has just replaced James Cleverly in the Middle East brief said the UK government “remain committed to the objective of a sovereign, prosperous Palestinian state living side by side with a safe and secure Israel.”
She added “it is vital that all Israel’s actions are in line with international humanitarian law and every effort is made to avoid civilian casualties.”
Milling said the UK also “unequivocally condemns Hamas’s inflammatory action and indiscriminate attacks against Israel.
“We continue to call on Hamas and other terrorist groups to end their abhorrent rocket attacks, such as those seen in May 2021. ”
Her speech came after a succession of MPs argued the case for recognition of Palestine now, with many suggesting this was needed to reignite peace talks with Israel.
Labour MP Julie Elliott, asked MPs: “Why are we shocked when international human rights organisation such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch come to the same or similar conclusions as many Palestinians long before, that their situation amounts to apartheid?
“What are the Government doing to end such widespread and systematic discrimination and oppression?
“The Government may dislike the terminology, but the level of discrimination cannot and must not be ignored.”
Elliott, who had secured the debate, added:”The UK should make it clear that any future state must include both the west bank and the Gaza Strip.
“We do not at this stage have to specify precise borders; there may be agreed equal land swaps.
“Let us remember that when Britain recognised Israel in 1950, it did so without defining borders or its capital.
“For too long, in fact for over 40 years, successive British Governments of all parties have claimed to support a two-state solution.
“This claim for Palestinians rings hollow.
“We recognise only one state, Israel, and refuse to recognise the other.
The Government’s position remains not now, but I ask the Government, ‘If not now, when?’”
Responding to the Labour MP, Matthew Offord, the Hendon Conservative said: “It is unfortunate that instead of promoting the resumption of direct peace talks without preconditions, the motion we are debating seeks to undermine the agreed framework for talks by premeditating the outcome of negotiations.
“The only route to a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians is through such talks, and I share the UK Government’s stated view that recognition of a Palestinian state should only come about at a time that best serves the objective of peace.
“Today’s motion neglects the reality that a two-state solution will be achieved only when both sides make the difficult compromises necessary to achieve it.”
Offord added:”The problem is that it is impossible to bring Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to the negotiating table.
“They refuse to negotiate without any preconditions. Until they do so, we will not have any peace in the state of Israel.”
His Tory colleague Stephen Crabb echoed this argument saying”it is complicated on the Palestinian side because who would the Israeli Government be talking to?
” Is it the Palestinian Authority, the old men in Ramallah, or is it the young extremists of Hamas in Gaza, who will claim to be the legitimate voice of the Palestinians? We are not talking about a simple situation.”
Jeremy Corbyn, a long-time pro-Palestinian campaigner said: “It is simply not tenable to continue with the narrative that somehow or other we can continue not recognising Palestine because the Palestinian leadership has not passed threshold X, Y or Z or jumped over this fence, that fence, that hurdle or the other, while all the time accepting the recognition of Israel.
“It gives a message to the Palestinian people that we do not care, that we are not very interested and that they will continue suffering under the occupation they are under.”
Labour’s Wayne David, a staunch support of the two state solution, argued: “If our aim is genuinely to see a two-state solution agreement that is acceptable to both sides, there must be a high degree of parity between the two negotiating parties.
“That is why I believe that the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state would give those peace negotiations the best chance of success.”
Christian Wakeford, now speaking from the Labour benches as the MP for Bury South said he wished to advance ” the concrete steps that can be taken to advance the prospect of a lasting solution between Israel and the Palestinians.
READ ALSO: Ukraine: defense ministry urges citizens to fight back as Russia enter Kyiv
“For us to recognise Palestinian statehood outside a wider peace process would make little or no impact in the real world.
“We need to take concrete steps that will advance and recognise both peoples’ right to self-determination, peace and security, and steps that will make a real difference to the lives of ordinary Israelis and Palestinians, rather than the kind of gestures that seek to demonise one side or the other.”
For the SNP, Alyn Smith told MPs: “Let me add a note of caution for those who are opposing Palestinian statehood or, even worse, are opposing it while pretending to just delay the process.
“The alternative is a one-state solution—one that I fear will never ever be able to be at peace with itself. Those of us who, however forlornly, support a two-state solution believe that recognition of the state of Palestine would give a badly needed impetus to that process.
“So I hope that the UK Government will change their course and I look forward to the Minister’s comments.”
